Dear Mr Gates,Thanks for this question which is “smart” by contents, but brings a “dread" by realistic impacts. This question is challenge for a human “reason”, and tempting topic for never ending idle talks.Let me introduce the SPC Concept. We offer solutions for multi functional tasks of social and economic development (SED) and disaster risk reduction (DRR) in environment of private-public partnership (PPP). The SPC Concept strengthens a community access to electricity, improves water management and motivates local people to participate on building of micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) with an ambition to utilize local natural renewable sources (RIS) for new jobs and business opportunities (building of a new industrial and business chain on local level). The SPC Concept assists dissemination of freedom in access to electricity, to water for life, to jobs via local renewable agriculture and industrial sources (e.g. flood-tolerant rice and bamboo or coconuts forests), and assists credibility of access to financial sources.The first pilot project is under preparation for a region of the Philippines and its results are transferable to all developing countries. The goal is add value to human “reason” and assist shifting of idle talks into a higher responsibility.We are looking a way to build a global public platform (based on a benchmarking approach) of all results of pilot projects preparation, implementation and evaluation. This is our understanding of question "Who Will Suffer Most from Climate Change?”ZdenekRead more

Respected Bill Gates, Earth is under the grip of Climate Change; anthropogenic activities are raising the level of CO2 by about 2 parts per million a year, in the atmosphere. India is not far from the impacts of Climate Change;more than 2000 people died due to summer heat waves in India, this year.The heat became so extreme that it melted some of New Delhi's roads. According to the recent study published in July 2015 edition of Journal Current Science, India has lost about 250 sq km to rising seas due to global warming. To cope with such situation, every household should donate or spent at least 1 Percent of income per month for Environment Protection. Environment, oxygen and carbon di-oxide can never be partitioned.Earth is under severe pressure.According to Global Footprint Network, humans have already used up this year's supply of natural resources in less than eight months, due to increasing demands of world population on the planet. UNITED WE can fight better than ISOLATED WE, against Climate Change. Climate Change is going to be irreversible.Every nation will face it if immediate and effective actions not taken.Regards Prabhat Misra [ Twitter- @PrabhatMisra, @RedTapeMovement, @May9CCD, @1percentincome ] Read more

If today's population is 7.3 billion and Mr. Gates says we will need 60% more food by 2050 that implies a population of 11.68 billion.

I've never seen such a projection. The average is only about 9.6 billion people.

Mr. Gates (as well as most commentators) also seem to think the next 35 years will not enjoy any of the spectacular technological improvements we have seen in the last 35 years (since 1980).

Is this because Mr. Gates is assuming the free market's role in the economy will continue its precipitous decline, and economic decisions will increasingly be made by politicians and bureaucrats rather than by individual people?

What a pity. Were it not for government interventions in economies around the world, we would probably already have eliminated all the poverty in the world, and would be watching private initiatives giving us a buffet of options for controlling the climate. Read more

There is a real disconnect between this author's desire to believe the corporate model of agriculture and the reality of actual agriculture.

Start with seeds. Farmers have been selecting and planting seeds for thousands of years. Along comes corporate agriculture and wars to disrupt the culture that originally developed and farmed the crops. Foundations decide the origins of human culture need to be employees of giant corporatist farms, after they have been displaced from their land and turned into the semi-slaves which corporate farms cannot exist without.

What kind of seeds are these new ones that do so much better than the old ones? They are seeds engineered to withstand carcinogenic glyphosate weed killer, need irrigation, and cannot be saved by the farmer to plant the next year.

Additionally, corporatist agriculture is an unproven new kid on the block that does not fit in very well. A major portion of global warming is from giant factory farming techniques that have spread chemical poisons into every human body on Earth even though they produce food for only about 30% of the world's food. There is little difference environmentally between giant communist farms and corporatist farms. Both mine the soil and wash it to the sea as they poison the environment. Corporatist and communist factory farms both require semi slave labor who, as the author says, "show up for work each day for the most part empty-handed." The vision is a semi-slave coming to work for someone else, rather than an independent family living on their farm.

Reading this article leads one to believe that the green revolution was not a dismal failure and that the plaque of farmer suicides in India did not begin with the false corporate claims about super seeds that a farmer had to borrow to buy. The farmers were not completely clear on the sneaky plan that they could no longer save seeds to plant the next year, or that the advertised yields required, fertilizers, carcinogenic glyphosate round-up and irrigation to approach the ideal yields advertised.

Bill Gates is pushing infinite growth on a finite planet and is blind to the well known fact that small family farms with traditional seeds outproduce corporate factory farms. He avoids the simple solution of education for those who have lost some of their traditional farming techniques from colonialism and war. He also actively ignores that when this minor amount of education includes women, there is a tendency toward smaller families.

It is impossible for corporations to exist in a gently declining population using less and less resources per person. If one's foundation rests upon infinite growth forever, then one simply cannot see there are other paths that lead to a healthy planet. Read more

oh please mr boss gives us the illussion people control their fate.sell us the idea some seeds specially designed (remember monsanto?) have the answer.Or maybe teaching farmers how to grow on land that produces enough wealth for foreign multinationals to survive and profit but cant help their own local people..(dont speak about mining ,dont!:):))It is really funny if you are not one of those who are affected by the ideas and actions of those who think they have some sort of god like right to decide just because they were greedy enough to step on others to profit...Its human nature i hear you say..capitalism.Is it?Educating slaves for the factories and the farms that will produce more profits for the global trade that will stop moving soon,due to the climate conditions worsening.The world is getting smaller,and lets try and fantasize it getting bigger instead.lets...we will die happier this way....heroin has the same effect you know?..History repeats only because people decide to repeat the same actions.From the east indian company ,to today nothing changed really.Greed rules...big up greed...Suicidal but big up..>Regards Read more

If Bill Gates were a Cathoic, he would be a Saint in the eyes of the Church. I know of no other person, who has given more of his personal time and resources to help the world's most needy. He sets an example that should energize other wealthy individuals to hep those in need.

The only issue I take with the efforts of Bill Gates and other philanthropic minded people, is the issue of stopping the wars that lead to and sustain global conflict, which is one of the greatest contributors to global poverty and suffering.

Each year, more than one trillion dollars is spent on military budgets, which could be much better spent on helping the most needy and on helping societies throughout the world, including millions of Americans.

People throughout the world are facing increasing difficulties in meeting the needs of their families and to cover th educational costs essential to their future survival and prosperity. If the world's richest people focused on creating peaceful solutions to conflict, it would radically change the lives for those most in need and help all members of society who face increasing difficulties in meeting their family needs.

If wars were the solution to conflict, why hasn't it worked over the thousands of years that wars have been used to settle conflicts? If you go back to any major conflict including World War One and Two, there is not a single nation or national leader that would agree that conflict was better than a negotiated peace. Ask every one of the millions of families that lost love ones if war was better than a negotiated solution.

The fact is that sanctions rather than war works. As evident in the South African apartheid situation, or the negotiated agreement on nuclear weapons in Iran, sanctions did work to bring about a solution without war.

The fact is, if the world used punitive and unlimited sanctions to isolate and punish belligerent nations, there would not be a need for war. Even North Korea is dependent on on foreign aid to survive.

If the world's weathiest people were to structure a negotiation process that would impose relentless sanctions in place of conflict and war, it would free up unlimited amounts of money to address the needs of all people throughout the world. It is important for non-government leaders to take up this cause. Political leaders are trapped in a political process that forces them to use the expedient process of going to war to get the desired results in the shortest time. However, as evident in the decades of war in the Middle East and Afghanistan, there is no such thing as a limited war to achieve desired results.

In the past, wars were generally fought with conventional armies, in which there were clear enemies and military targets. Conventional warfare has been replaced with geurrilla warfare, which does not have readily definable targets and enemies. Vietnam is an example of how the United states, the most powerful military nation in the world, supported by many other nations in SEATO, lost a war against a small nation using geurrilla warfare. Similar results have occurred in other Middle East and Asian nations.

The fact is that you cannot bomb ideologies or determination into submission. This was clearly demonstrated in World War Two, where bombing only increased the resolve of the Bristish and German people to carry on the war at all costs. The fact is that war does not work. It has never led to lasting peace and generally creates an environment for the next war, which is what the Treaty of Versailles achieved.

If the world spent a fraction of time negotiating a peaceful solution rather than going to war, the world would be a much better place. However, peaceful negotiations must be a two way street in which all sides must accept compromise. No nation has the solution to the needs of all other societies. Many nations have existed for thousands of years and have deeply embedded cultures, which are not ammenable to quick change. Change takes time, and it can only be achieved withi the culture and history of a given nation. For any outside nation to demand immediate change to an alternate social system simply will not work. In some cases, it may take a generation or two for a nation to evolve into a more democratic system. However, such change is infinitely better than forcing change on governments such as those in the Middle East through war.

Having studied history for most of my 75 years, I have changed from a hawk to a pacifist. There can be no justification for killing millions of innocent people and families to satisfy the needs of other nations. It does not and never will work.

How hard would it be to orbit a 1000 square mile solar shield to cool the planet? The technology exists and the cost would probably be reasonable.

We could even make it positionable for climate control - park it over a hurricane to slow down the storm, park it over a high pressure to lower the pressure and get rain, etc.

I hope you like that suggestion Bill. Having spent the last 18 years being poisoned by a stalker gang, - without be able to interest law enforcement or the government - I suspect the brain damage is accumulating to the point that I will not be making too many more.. Read more

Given that it is a virtual certainty that the earth will get uncomfortably hotter or cooler, and given that it could be sooner than expected or even suddenly, and given that the systemic risks of such an event are extreme, NASA should prioritize protective space umbrellas well above essentially pointless Mars missions.. Read more

The Republican party is winning votes by selling the line that it is a hoax.

American needs to be on board or any global initiative is sunk.

How can Republicans be made to understood that 1% uncertainty in science means that we are really, really, really sure?

Also, US and EU farm subsidies undercut food prices, and therefore make it far more difficult for the poorest farmers on the planet to accumulate capital. Global leaders should engage in a shaming campaign for these disastrous subsidies. Ending US and Eu farm subsidies is no silver bullet, but it's the closet thing we have for the poorest people on the planet. Read more

I share Mr. Gates’ wish for an Africa that can feed itself, but I can’t realistically bet that this will happen in 15 years. Per capita food production for Africa’s current estimated population of 1.2 billion people continues to decline, as do average crop yields for major staples. With up to 65% of Africa’s soils suffering from falling fertility, it is difficult to see how Africa can reverse a decline in per capita food production to feed a projected 1.5 billion people in 2030. Forests and pasture land is also in decline. Meanwhile, Africa’s annual food import bill continues to rise dramatically as does the number of hungry and poorly nourished Africans, especially stunted children. Read more

EIC (economyincrisis.org) published every idea on Global Economic Issues for the last five years. Project-syndicate.org also produces similar ideas from mostly Economists. It is setup by Mr. Bill gates and Groups, and he does produce issues there too. To sum it up such massive information in a nut-shell:1. TPP: It is basically by Pharmaceutical and Hollywood with other low level groups…so it will stay forever.2. Wall Street: Look at stock market that gets it money from Imports that supports a lot of rich people. It is staying there forever.2. International Bank: (From PetroDollars) Due to our currency for now that will stay as it supports the Wall Street almost forever.3. Trade: No matter what you call them, it is what supports Wall Street and International Bank and hence stays there forever.4. Citizen: Those who have money are involved in top three and hence it is what it is and causing a mess of Business Processes towards Chaos. In other words: "Civilization begins with order, grows with liberty and dies with chaos.” – Will DurantThe only way to solve our present Global Economic Issue is Industrial Ecosystems that was advised to China in 1983, that can support. We are trying to do this elsewhere but no one is listening that, simply because they have the so called solutions for the “forever” issues.Read more

Dear Mr. Gates:If you read this in your article, I have a suggestion for you. Your foundation can connect the dots. Presently we have a series of items such as TPP, Wall Street. Petrodollars, Foreign Trade, and Citizen Resources that are causing a Complex Chaotic Event that does not have easy solutions except my Advanced Industrial Ecosystems, the basic one was done for China in 1983.. So, please think and I can help – if you want to. Thank you.

"Civilization begins with order, grows with liberty and dies with chaos.” – Will DurantRead more

Looking what is happening in US (California, severe weather, and so on) and looking to the air and water and big pollution problems in US, I think is unsafe to put climate change problems in distant places like India. It is going to affect all of us, for sure, including US. Another good book is Climate Wars fom Gwynne Dyer.

Not in my backyard is a myth that I also found on that discussions. Even believers of planet coming life collapse, still thinks will reach distant places and nations...

I do not have time to wrote too much here, but I will come back.You have to blame ourselves, at first place, about what is happening in the world, not only climate, but all the problems are a direcc consequence of our economic system, our companies, our governments and our ways of life.

I suggest you to know the findings of the great Nicholas Georgescu Roegen, that in mid-1960 found a striking problem in the economic field. Here we have the first reason why we are in this mess. But his findings were not incorporated in the economic field, that up to now still teaches students that our world is infinite.

To end up, shorter than I wish, we have to blame ourselves. Wealth concentration is at a humanity record today. This is a big issue. Richer are get richer and only cents reach the poor even in the advanced nations. Piketty is a very good reference about this subject.

Climate chante is not "the" problem, but one of the problems and it is just a direct consequence of our system, that now is collapsing. And to answer your question, who will suffer most from this entire situation? All of us, since in Nature we are all one.

I am writing this because you belong to a superclass, the only part of the wrold that really can help to change this situation. Ordinary people are fighting to survive in an economic canibalism. The only problem is how to change without sacrifices?

We can chose our destiny, but we cannot say we did not know what was going to happen now and in near future.

I have worked in West and East Africa on agricultural issues since the late 1970s and what is too often stressed is productivity improvements. This is the line of Big Agriculture and the Big Agro-Chemical companies. But I encourage anyone who thinks they know better to try to eke out a living in marginal environmental environments the way farmers int he developing world do. They know a lot about their local environments and are quite capable of adapting. However, what is desperately needed is improvements in marketing infrastructure and information. So often I have seen food rotting in fields and roadsides and even in local markets for want of warehouses, rural roads, adapted transport, crop insurance, and market information. This is needed more than so-called improved seeds, which is just a euphemism for GMO seed. If the Gates foundation wanted to really make a difference they would finance market infrastructure not the interests f Big Ag. Read more

You may be RIGHT on Obama. Last January I asked him to present a 100 GW Electrical Power to India using Natural Gas as the fuel that I had in Louisiana and Generators by three different groups to keep a Global Unity. But he offered perhaps via Indian business people a Nuclear System to India (think Bhopal) using fuel from Australia. I tried to do the same with Bill gates several Years ago but that did not go anywhere. My idea was to do 3000 GW for India by 2030.

Hope Mr. Gates reads his own article’s comments too. We can change the process very quickly.Read more

The ongoing economic disaster that has become evident since 2008 is not going to be solved with 'better ideas becoming available'. It will be solved through political will - if Joe Bloggs put down his Budweiser, turned off the football and spent the afternoon understanding what the hell is going on with big businessmen, big banks and government the economic issues would be solved tomorrow. Instead he is happy to get his news from a CNN soundbite. He needs to vote out corporate representatives and vote in representatives of the people. Obama was supposed to be that guy - but once he got close to power the Dems pulled him aside and said - "Look, you can't be for the people - they don't pay donations - corporations do. Kapish?" Read more

All well and good to express concern for the poor but we need to be aware of the dangers of helping them with ideas that hang them out to dry when external elements change. Fertilisers cost big time and can disappear. Access to markets cost and can change with greedy middle men. Energy costs and need to be reliable which adds to the cost. With the model proposed there will be disruption to the community if at least moderately successful. People notice change and will flock in to be part of the benefits, displacing the original inhabitants. A bit like big corporation chasing the low hanging fruit. By all means help communities in need but think it through because we have enough dispossessed people relying on handouts or worse, starving. As for climate change, there will be winners and losers. Those who think they can ride that wave may be in for a rude awakening because maybe, just maybe the poor and needy will surprise us all. Read more

I agree with most of the other comments.It is admirable what the Gates Foundation is doing for poor countries all over the world.Still I have to argue with the title and the answer provided in the article.

We evolved into a global, fully integrated system. Which means we all depend on each other even for our daily necessities.Thus we all suffer or rejoice together whether we want it or not.A global, integral system works on the "all or nothing" principle. Or we can consider it as many people suggest, "we are all sitting on the same boat".

We can see this proven daily from events on the financial markets, in the global economy, through environmental changes and so on.So there is and will be no difference in suffering when conditions worsen, when financial markets start tumbling and the present "virtual solutions" can't plug the holes any longer. We will all suffer as environmental disasters get more serious affecting our daily lives regardless of where we live.

Poor people might feel it sooner as they have no reserves but they are used to poverty, to daily fight for survival. While we in rich Western societies are much more spoilt we can't even survive missing an anticipated sporting event, favorite TV show, or losing our smartphones.

Thus when we are helping others we are actually helping ourselves as we are all chained together.There is no act of "charity or philanthropy" these days only mutually fighting for our common survival, everybody with whatever they have. Read more

I admire your and your wife's humanatarian efforts greatly. While the poor farmers of India and my native Pakistan are clearly at a disadvantage as a result of poverty, beyond global warming however, there is a far bigger and pressing challange that has to do with energy. There are nearly 20 million small farmers in Pakistan, close to 40% of what they produce goes to waste each year. That's a lot of water and other precious resources. This happens due to spoilage and a lack of cold storage at the farms or local distribution centers. To make matters worse, these poor farmers have no visibility to the market and layers of middle men bake in the spoilage to the prices they pay the farmers. I lead a study to develop an intigrated cold storage project but ran into the reality of power outages. It is indeed a conundrum; poverty and the direct correlation with energy, or lack there of. And in many cases, fossil fuel based energy is the only affordable alternative. Read more

I would also like to note that Project Syndicate is a Bill and Melinda initiative - and is really the only place online where quality content and discussion occurs on economic matters. Obrigado.Read more

Why not register an account with us, too? You'll be able to follow individual authors (to receive notifications whenever they publish new articles) and subscribe to more specific, topic-based newsletters.

Project Syndicate provides readers with original, engaging, and thought-provoking commentaries by global leaders and thinkers. By offering incisive perspectives from those who are shaping the world’s economics, politics, science, and culture, Project Syndicate has created an unrivaled global venue for informed public debate.